ArticlePloS one2026
Wild mushroom consumption susceptibility among Chinese university students: A machine learning study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate factors associated with susceptibility to wild mushroom consumption using machine learning approaches and identify key predictors for targeted intervention development.
methodsA cross-sectional survey of 216 Chinese university students employed three machine learning algorithms (Logistic Regression, Random Forest, Extremely Randomized Trees [ExtraTrees]) to predict consumption susceptibility based on demographics, media usage, and cognitive factors. Susceptibility was assessed through scenario-based questions following established frameworks from tobacco research. Model performance was evaluated using AUC with 95% confidence intervals calculated via bootstrap resampling (1,000 iterations). Sensitivity analyses were conducted using alternative susceptibility thresholds.
results65.3% were classified as susceptible to consumption. Logistic Regression achieved highest performance (AUC = 0.776, 95% CI: 0.679-0.862). Risk perception emerged as the strongest predictor (importance = 0.133 ± 0.044), followed by mushroom picking experience (0.101 ± 0.017) and content impression (0.089 ± 0.018). Among the 63 participants (29.2%) who reported using AI models, 75.93% indicated trust levels of 'fairly trust' or above.
conclusionsIn this exploratory study of Chinese university students from a single institution, cognitive factors, particularly risk perception and identification ability, showed the strongest associations with consumption susceptibility. These preliminary findings suggest that targeted interventions enhancing risk awareness may be relevant for this population, though replication across diverse samples is needed before broader conclusions can be drawn.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.